Python packaging documentation feedback and discussion

[sinoroc]

@lwasser

if you look at this part of the packaging tutorial , immediately users are asked to make a decision about back end tools. But most have no idea what the difference is between them. each back end each have subtle differences

I started something to maybe answer this here, but I have no idea if this rough first take at this is a good way to address this or not, feel free to leave feedback.

@brettcannon

@lwasser

4. what does a python package look like (should we use src/ etc?)

As for point 4, that’s going to be personal/tool-specific.

I firmly believe PyPA should take a stance here. Decide on a canonical project directory structure and development workflow, document it clearly, advertize it, strongly recommend it, and then let it match the default behavior of PyPA’s one packaging tool (if any).
Maybe it could even go as far as saying: “do use black, nox, ruff, and so on” (a bit like create-react-app does). So I guess it could be a cookiecutter template. So that PyPA can focus their resources on a limited amount of things.

@lwasser

In a review, someone needs to be on top of moderation to steer conversation. Comments can become circular but that’s ok. Ask questions to get to the bottom of the issues.

Yes! I am not entirely sure if this refers to the “strategy” and “vision” discussions here, but I definitely feel like it is sorely needed here on Packaging for those longer but critical discussions. These very long discussions are full of repetitions and asides (I am probably guilty of some of them) that feel quite counter-productive. For example I guess if there was someone who could promptly split the discussions into a separate topic as soon as some kind of inner thread of 3+ messages forms, this could already be quite the breath of fresh air for everyone and would give more space to both the original thread and the split one.

@pf_moore

@rgommers

Without a much clearer plan for following up on these discussions, I think the energy is going to continue ebbing away.

I agree. The lack of any substantial results from the first discussion has certainly put me off investing any time or energy into the second and any subsequent ones.

Same, and same as above I feel like some authority to keep things on track is needed.

Maybe I interpret intentions wrong (and maybe I will get chewed for saying it) but I also feel like starting a topic asking for contributions and opinions, setting rules and an end date and so on, all this to end up not being active in the discussion, not making sure that the rules are enforced that the discussion stays on track and that the discussion ends up in a conclusion of some sort before the end date is kind of… rude maybe? I do not know how else to say it.